People v. Lugo

January 5, 2010

THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT,v.SANTIAGO LUGO, APPELLANT.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Latella, J.), rendered June 18, 2007, convicting him of rape in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree (four counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

The defendant contends that the Supreme Court erroneously failed to require the People to provide race-neutral explanations for their peremptory challenges to certain jurors during earlier rounds of voir dire, after the court ruled in the fourth round that a prima facie case of discrimination was established (see Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79). However, this contention is unpreserved for appellate review, as defense counsel never requested explanations for the challenges exercised during the first and third rounds after the court found, during the fourth round, that the prima facie case was established (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v James, 99 NY2d 264, 271-272; People v Patterson, 40 AD3d 659; People v Figueroa, 276 AD2d 561; People v Hernandez, 266 AD2d 311; People v Caston, 239 AD2d 355; People v Font, 223 AD2d 600).

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.